Associate
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2007
- Posts
- 600
- Location
- gloucestershire
ban driving may as well
Busted . .
- Thread starter Concrete
- Start date
You see the RED PHONE like symbol near the green one, well that is when you want to end a call, technology these days is amazing.
Do you know what the funny thing is, I only answered it to tell the person that I was driving and I would call them back.
Typical, that maybe the first time in 6 months that I answer a phone while in the car I get done. That's life, I was in the wrong and got done, still hope his whole family dies in a fire, and he inhales enough smoke to die from lung cancer over a period of a couple of years, but hey, I'm not bitter
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2007
- Posts
- 600
- Location
- gloucestershire
lol a tad harsh but i see your anger
Yes, GOD FORBID he actually uses his phone whilst travelling at 5mph.
I would love to see how many people preaching about full attention would still be anti-phone if it was still legal.
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Jul 2007
- Posts
- 600
- Location
- gloucestershire
Rediculus statement.
The simple fact is that he is in control of a vehicle in a traffic situation, thats how police see it and he got punished for not waiting, pulling over and answering safely whilst the vehicle is under a controlled stop, being sat at lights doesnt count as such.
West said:
How is being sat stationary with the handbrake on, out of gear, NOT MOVING, any different to being sat at the side of the road, with the handbrake on, out of gear, NOT MOVING.
All that is necessary is to hang up your phone and put it down if you feel that more attention is required.
this 'BUT HE IS NOT IN CONTROL OF HIS CAR AND LIKE, HIS ENGINE IS RUNNING, AND ERRRR HE'S ON HIS PHONE' line is complete BS
depends how retarded you are behind the wheel.
Fantastic question.
oh yes, it really was a superb extension of logic.
Clearly, using your phone at 70mph on the motorway in rush hour traffic when everyone is up each others backside is not the time and place to use your phone. But trickling along in traffic, what's the big deal?
That's the problem with road enforcement today. It leaves no room for judgement up to the driver and relies too heavily upon speed cameras that do absolutely nothing to catch the real dangerous drivers on the road, i.e. old people who can't see their hands on the wheel and would have difficulty escaping from a spontaneous attack from a tortoise, let alone apply the brake fast enough in an emergency situation; drunk/stoned/high as a kite drivers who are well within the speedlimit but don't have a ****ing clue what's going on; and people who are just so inept it's a miracle they don't kill 10 people each time they get behind the wheel.
Do you know what the funny thing is, I only answered it to tell the person that I was driving and I would call them back.
Typical, that maybe the first time in 6 months that I answer a phone while in the car I get done. That's life, I was in the wrong and got done, still hope his whole family dies in a fire, and he inhales enough smoke to die from lung cancer over a period of a couple of years, but hey, I'm not bitter
Just to clarify that I wasn't really knocking you for it. Simply posting the view that the police officer would have had on the siutation.
If my phone started going and I didn't have a hands free then I usually don't answer it, unless it looks like an important call - but then if I'm going at normal speed I probably still wouldn't. And I can't really put my hands up and say I would have terminated the call if the traffic started moving again either, in that situation. Honestly if my phone went and traffic was stopped I'd probably answer it - why the hell not!? Oh yeah, that black and white clause in the 2007 edition of motoring law :/
All it boils down to at the end of the day.
which is my problem with your point of view in this thread. You are exercising no common sense or thought process of your own, just chiming off with the 'it's ILLEGAL, and the law is ALWAYS right' line.
